MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W3012260343 · doi:10.1002/isaf.1470

A predictive system integrating intrinsic mode functions, artificial neural networks, and genetic algorithms for forecasting S&P500 intra‐day data

2020· article· en· W3012260343 on OpenAlex

Why this work is in the frame

A frame that forgets how it found something cannot be audited. These are the routes that admitted this work.

affAt least one author lists a Canadian institution in the pinned OpenAlex snapshot.

Bibliographic record

VenueIntelligent systems in accounting, finance and management/Intelligent systems in accounting, finance & management · 2020
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldDecision Sciences
TopicStock Market Forecasting Methods
Canadian institutionsConcordia University
Fundersnot available
KeywordsArtificial neural networkHilbert–Huang transformComputer scienceMean squared errorArtificial intelligenceStock market predictionMean absolute percentage errorData miningWaveletAlgorithmStock marketMachine learningPattern recognition (psychology)MathematicsStatistics

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Summary There is an abundant literature on the design of intelligent systems to forecast stock market indices. In general, the existing stock market price forecasting approaches can achieve good results. The goal of our study is to develop an effective intelligent predictive system to improve the forecasting accuracy. Therefore, our proposed predictive system integrates adaptive filtering, artificial neural networks (ANNs), and evolutionary optimization. Specifically, it is based on the empirical mode decomposition (EMD), which is a useful adaptive signal‐processing technique, and ANNs, which are powerful adaptive intelligent systems suitable for noisy data learning and prediction, such as stock market intra‐day data. Our system hybridizes intrinsic mode functions (IMFs) obtained from EMD and ANNs optimized by genetic algorithms (GAs) for the analysis and forecasting of S&P500 intra‐day price data. For comparison purposes, the performance of the EMD‐GA‐ANN presented is compared with that of a GA‐ANN trained with a wavelet transform's (WT's) resulting approximation and details coefficients, and a GA‐general regression neural network (GRNN) trained with price historical data. The mean absolute deviation, mean absolute error, and root‐mean‐squared errors show evidence of the superiority of EMD‐GA‐ANN over WT‐GA‐ANN and GA‐GRNN. In addition, it outperformed existing predictive systems tested on the same data set. Furthermore, our hybrid predictive system is relatively easy to implement and not highly time‐consuming to run. Furthermore, it was found that the Daubechies wavelet showed quite a higher prediction accuracy than the Haar wavelet. Moreover, prediction errors decrease with the level of decomposition.

Fetched live from OpenAlex and de-inverted. Abstracts are not stored in this database: the inverted indexes are 8.6 GB of the frame’s 9.3 GB of text, and the host has 13 GB free.

Full frame distilled prediction

Teacher imitation

Not calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. Learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and 10,348 direct Gemma labels. Candidate is the union of thresholded teacher heads; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels or direct frontier model labels.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.014
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.002
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesMeta-epidemiology (narrow), Scholarly communication
Consensus categoriesMeta-epidemiology (narrow)
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Simulation or modeling · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.891
Threshold uncertainty score1.000

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0140.002
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0020.002
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0030.000
Bibliometrics0.0020.004
Science and technology studies0.0010.000
Scholarly communication0.0030.002
Open science0.0040.004
Research integrity0.0010.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0000.000

Machine scores (provisional)

The two teacher heads of the student model, read on this work. A score orders the frame for review; it never asserts a category, and the validation status ships verbatim with every row.

Baseline scores from an immature model (maturity gate not passed, 7 training rounds). Scores rank; they never assert a category.

Opus teacher head0.120
GPT teacher head0.349
Teacher spread0.229 · how far apart the two teachers sit on this one work
Validation statusscore_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from it